Posted on Tuesday, September 5, 2006 - 3:40 pm:

---

quote:

From the New York Times

"...What's even more troubling is that the group [National Federation for the Blind] has accepted a $1 million gift for a new training institute from Diebold, the machines' manufacturer, which put the testimonial on its Web site. The federation stands by its "complete confidence" in Diebold even though several recent studies have raised serious doubts about the company, and California has banned more than 14,000 Diebold machines from being used this November because of doubts about their reliability.

"Disability-rights groups have had an outsized influence on the debate despite their general lack of background on security issues. The League of Women Voters has been a leading opponent of voter-verifiable paper trails, in part because it has accepted the disability groups' arguments.

..."Some supporters of voter-verifiable paper trails question whether disability-rights groups have gotten too close to voting machine manufacturers. Besides the donation by Diebold to the National Federation of the Blind, there have been other gifts. According to Mr. Dickson, the American Association of People with Disabilities has received $26,000 from voting machine companies this year.

"The real issue, though, is that disability-rights groups have been clouding the voting machine debate by suggesting that the nation must choose between accessible voting and verifiable voting. It is well within the realm of technology to produce machines that meet both needs. Meanwhile, it would be a grave mistake for election officials to rush to spend millions of dollars on paperless electronic voting machines that may quickly become obsolete..."

---

---

quote:

"...On October 6, 2003 I filed, pro se, case number 03-1276A, a civil racketeering complaint, in the United States District Court, Eastern District of Virginia, (Alexandria). I named the following as defendants; the National Federation of the Blind (NFB), Diebold, Inc. and ten banks.
My complaint alleges that the NFB and Diebold, Inc., formed an association in fact, when they signed a partnership agreement several years ago. The partnership agreement was a condition of a settlement of an ADA complaint filed against Diebold, Inc. by the NFB. That complaint, brought forth by the NFB, was filed against Diebold, Inc., Chevy Chase Bank, and Rite Aid Corp. The NFB alleged that the ATMs owned by Chevy Chase Bank, located in Rite Aid Stores and manufactured by Diebold, Inc., were not accessible to the blind.

"The complaint was settled out of court, in addition to the partnership agreement with the NFB, Diebold, Inc. agreed, as a condition of the settlement, to "donate" one million dollars to the NFB. The donation, as a condition of settlement was extraordinary, not because of the size of the "donation", but because damages in ADA cases are limited to the actual damage caused to the complainant and punitive damages are generally not allowed.

"Following this settlement, the NFB began filing complaints against bank after bank over ATM accessibility, all of these were settled out of court, and each time partnerships between the NFB and the banks were announced. ... Since ... the beginning of this series of lawsuits, the NFB has built a nineteen million dollar technology center, Diebold, Inc.?s revenues have increased dramatically in an industry where growth has remained relatively flat.

"...In every state the NFB or its members have been lobbying ruthlessly for the Diebold, Inc. machines on the basis of "accessibility" to the exclusion of equally accessible equipment. There have been numerous threats of lawsuits if Diebold, Inc?s machines are not purchased. I am sure that you have an excellent staff and are already aware of the problems with the Diebold, Inc. machines, so I apologize for taking valuable time explaining the issues, as a blind person, it is important to me to be perfectly clear, so I will explain. The Diebold, Inc. machines have no accountability, no way of verifying votes ... I have also spoken to state election board officials in several states ... Election officials feel that they have been bullied by the members of the NFB, many feel that they have no choice but to acquiesce.

"In short, the NFB is using it?s nominal advocacy position for the blind to cover for it?s economic and partnership interests with Diebold, Inc. in the placement of these voting machines. Diebold, Inc. is not the only manufacturer of accessible machines, other manufacturers make machines that are accessible AND accountable.

"On the subject of my RICO suit, I filed pro se, I am not an attorney, I need help. There have been two hearings on pretrial motions so far. At the last hearing, fourteen attorneys representing the defendant banks, Diebold, Inc. and the NFB were present. Several made motions for dismissal, Judge T.S. Ellis, III, refused to hear these motions, he ordered a stay on all motions for three, and then changed it to four weeks, he stated that my complaint was "not without merit", but that I need an attorney, he said repeatedly that he could not appoint me an attorney, but that I needed an attorney.

"I have contacted the United States Department of Justice for help in this matter, I have received no response. I have contacted many attorneys in the Washington D.C. area, most have stated that the case is too complex, many have conflict of interest reasons for not taking the case. If I do not have an attorney, my complaint may be dismissed, even if it is not dismissed, I cannot possibly continue this on my own, I have said all along that I would take this as far as I could by myself and I will, but I am getting very close to my self imposed line.

"... This is now no longer just an issue that affects the blind, it carries serious consequences for our free and fair elections."

Sincerely,
Kelly Gutensohn

---